Germany - Namibia

[Jervis]

In the news today - Germany admits genocide in Namibia  

[KONDOA]

Hardly generous given that it is spread over 30 years.

[Holger Kotthaus]

On 28/05/2021 at 17:39, KONDOA said:

Hardly generous given that it is spread over 30 years.

I Agree; - But it is probably obsolete to start a historical debate about it here.

[Sarcasm] But the moral and ethical claim of today's German government is all the more clear.

These Germans knows everything better again and show the world where they have to go. [/Sarcasm]

 

Do I hear the historical echo: “Am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen“?

Doesn't that list exactly what these people are actually trying to avoid?

 

 

 

 

Edited 30 May , 2021 by Holger Kotthaus

[healdav]

23 minutes ago, Holger Kotthaus said:

I Agree; - But it is probably obsolete to start a historical debate about it here.

[Sarcasm] But the moral and ethical claim of today's German government is all the more clear.

These Germans knows everything better again and show the world where they have to go. [/Sarcasm]

 

Do I hear the historical echo: “Am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen“?

Doesn't that list exactly what these people are actually trying to avoid?

 

 

 

 

You obviously don't know any Germans of today.

[Hedley Malloch]

53 minutes ago, Holger Kotthaus said:

I Agree; - But it is probably obsolete to start a historical debate about it here.

 

 

 

 

 

If this is not the place for historical debate, then what are we doing here? 

 

What the German army did in German SW Africa is essential for understanding how the Germans managed the occupied territories in France, Belgium and Eastern Europe during WW1. By far and away the best book on the German occupation is Isabel Hull's 'Absolute Destruction: Military Culture and and the Practices of War in Imperial Germany', Cornell University Press, 2005. Her analysis starts with three chapters on German policies in SW Africa between 1904-07. When I first read this book, I did not understand why she took this as her starting point. By the time I had finished, I understood completely. It was here that the German army demonstrated its approach to the management of occupation which it was to deploy so ruthlessly in Europe from 1914 onwards.

[AOK4]

5 minutes ago, Hedley Malloch said:

If this is not the place for historical debate, then what are we doing here? 

 

What the German army did in German SW Africa is essential for understanding how the Germans managed the occupied territories in France, Belgium and Eastern Europe during WW1. By far and away the best book on the German occupation is Isabel Hull's 'Absolute Destruction: Military Culture and and the Practices of War in Imperial Germany', Cornell University Press, 2005. Her analysis starts with three chapters on German policies in SW Africa between 1904-07. When I first read this book, I did not understand why she took this as her starting point. By the time I had finished, I understood completely. It was here that the German army demonstrated its approach to the management of occupation which it was to deploy so ruthlessly in Europe from 1914 onwards.

 

I disagree with you in this. What Germany did (1900-1918) was not that different from what other countries at that time did (the US driving the native people into concentration camps in the desert, France and Britain reacting to colonial uprisings, ...). I have read an enormous amount of sources and war diaries etc about the German occupation 1914-1918 and although certain elements were quite harsh, I do see similar things on the other side. I also read and have heard a lot of stories of compassion from German soldiers towards the occupied civilians. You should read what the Belgians and French (and other nations) did when they occupied parts of Germany (or other newly acquired territories) after the war. I often read and see exactly the same reprisals as in occupied Belgium/France.

 

But I know that in Germany, it is nowadays bon ton to prove that everything in the German Empire (especially its colonial system and its military) led to what happened under Nazi rule.

[Hedley Malloch]

7 minutes ago, AOK4 said:

 

I disagree with you in this. What Germany did (1900-1918) was not that different from what other countries at that time did (the US driving the native people into concentration camps in the desert, France and Britain reacting to colonial uprisings, ...). I have read an enormous amount of sources and war diaries etc about the German occupation 1914-1918 and although certain elements were quite harsh, I do see similar things on the other side. I also read and have heard a lot of stories of compassion from German soldiers towards the occupied civilians. You should read what the Belgians and French (and other nations) did when they occupied parts of Germany (or other newly acquired territories) after the war. I often read and see exactly the same reprisals as in occupied Belgium/France.

 

But I know that in Germany, it is nowadays bon ton to prove that everything in the German Empire (especially its colonial system and its military) led to what happened under Nazi rule.

 

Whataboutery, Jan, sheer whataboutery. Stick to the subject - how the German occupation of Namibia informed their management of occupied Europe during WW1. And it is not helpful to use the fate of the north American Indian as a moral body-shield for the German excesses inflicted on the Belgians, French. Focus on the argument - why did the Germans (note - the Germans, not the US Cavalry) behave they way in which they did.

[Holger Kotthaus]

Wow; - Gents I am impressed.

It was clear to me that this was a very emotional and sensitive topic.

But that the first three contributions, derailed in such a way, and terms like, Nazis, German war

atrocities and the occupation of conquered areas in WWI, I really would not have suspected.

 

Maybe some of you should read my comment again in peace. I have neither denied nor defended the

historical background and events and I will not comment on them. My remarks only concerned the

payment of this sum by the German government; - nothing more.

Edited 30 May , 2021 by Holger Kotthaus

[AOK4]

46 minutes ago, Hedley Malloch said:

 

Whataboutery, Jan, sheer whataboutery. Stick to the subject - how the German occupation of Namibia informed their management of occupied Europe during WW1. And it is not helpful to use the fate of the north American Indian as a moral body-shield for the German excesses inflicted on the Belgians, French. Focus on the argument - why did the Germans (note - the Germans, not the US Cavalry) behave they way in which they did.

 

I just say all countries did very similar things, I am not justifying anyone.

 

I won't comment any further as this discussion just leads nowhere in my opinion.

[KONDOA]

My view on this remains that 1 billion over 30 years is not impactful (?) To the present citizens. We cannot change the past but can influence the future so in my opinion an improved timescale could benefit the country and its people in a more positive manner.

 

If the funds are earmarked for long term education or healthcare one can see the rationale. However, little detail was provided.

 

Roop

Edited 30 May , 2021 by KONDOA

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

1 hour ago, Holger Kotthaus said:

Maybe some of you should read my comment again in peace.

I'm sorry but I think your comment has probably lost something in translation.

It's not clear at all to me what you are trying to say, or what or whom your [sarcasm] [/sarcasm] tags refer to.

Could you try re-posting a less complicated statement?

 

[Holger Kotthaus]

1 hour ago, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

I'm sorry but I think your comment has probably lost something in translation.

It's not clear at all to me what you are trying to say, or what or whom your [sarcasm] [/sarcasm] tags refer to.

Could you try re-posting a less complicated statement?

I have to accept, that not everything could be translated into other languages.

But you request it’s like I have to explain the punch line of my own joke afterwards.

I have to put up with the fact that not everyone understands.

 

What is Sarcasm = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

Perhaps, under these criteria, my original words are better to understand.

 

But I don't want to participate in further discussions, because the actual topic with

the time phase from 1904-1908 didn´t fit into the Great War Forum (1914-1918).

Cheers Holger

 

 

[phil andrade]

Weren't there also some very harsh imperial  reprisals against rebellions in German East Africa ?

 

I can't remember the name of the tribe involved.

 

A lot of the askari fought enthusiastically for the Germans, so there must have been a degree of loyalty extant, or was it more a matter of inducement, if not coercion ?

 

If memory serves me, Africans who experienced German rule and were able to make comparisons with other imperial regimes, considered the Germans to be hard but fair.

 

They were known as " the fifteen" on account of a standard fifteen lashes that would be administered for certain infractions.

 

I've recently finished reading that excellent book TIP AND RUN, and it's a complex war to read about, let alone understand.  The author unreservedly depicts the harshness and atrocity of German rule, but is equally candid about the behaviour of Belgian, Portuguese and British administration.

 

By announcing this reparation programme now, might the Germans be following the adage that he who gives first gives twice, thereby escaping a heavier forfeit when, in the years to come, other nations are held to account for their transgressions in the  eyes of posterity ?

 

 

Phil

Edited 31 May , 2021 by phil andrade

[egbert]

1 hour ago, phil andrade said:

 

.........in the years to come, other nations are held to account for their transgressions in the  eyes of posterity ?

 

Phil

Exactly.

@Hedley:  Comes to my mind the old saying which is still relevant: "Those who live in a glass house shouldn`t throw stones".........

 

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

I think Hedley's comments are reasonable and fair, inviting posters to focus on the news item in the OP.

Subsequent whataboutery and glass house comments only act to divert attention away from the fact that Germany has admitted genocide in South-West Africa.

 

By all means, start a separate  topic on the issue of German, Belgian, French, Spanish, American, Turkish, British, Japanese, Russian, Chinese  or Dutch atrocities in other places at other times. Most will fall outside the remit of this forum, but there's probably somewhere on the net where opinions can be expressed.

 

This thread is specifically about the present German government admitting to one of its  antecedents performing genocide in South-West Africa in the first decade of the last century.

[Guest]

Mate,

 

Its seams strange that on the one hand you bring up this sad time in History, and reject the same things in other countries, under other Govts?

 

The other week I had a some what same discussion with a Turkish mate on what happened in his country, since these forums is not the place for that discussion?

When he mentioned, "the peaceful movement of that peoples to safe areas", or words to that effect, I could not believe we still agree with this often over looked area of the Great War?

 

The "G" word has been used in the past and was used back then to comment on what happen in many places in the world under Colonial Govts, weather China, Africa, India, Philipines, New Zealand and yes even Australia. Colonial powers did a lot wrong.

 

I just finished a work on the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879, you don't see the same sort issues used by the British to force the Zulu or what Belgium did in the Congo?

 

Read your histories its still in there, back then they were not afraid to mention what they did, as they didn't see it was wrong?

 

The so called modern world is a different place and we have to relive these things, like my discussion with mates on what Japan did in the Second War. they seam to forget as their histories don't have any details, or on going to museums in Germany, how they miss the period of the Second War ?

 

The past is some thing we all must live with, as some people like to throw it back in our faces, from time to time?

 

S.B

 

 

 

 

[Hedley Malloch]

On 31/05/2021 at 11:28, egbert said:

Exactly.

@Hedley:  Comes to my mind the old saying which is still relevant: "Those who live in a glass house shouldn`t throw stones".........

 

Egbert: more whataboutery. The standards by which the German occupation are to be judged are laid down in The Hague and Geneva Conventions (which Germany freely signed), not by what other people did or did not do. These Conventions laid down absolute standards of behaviour, not relative ones.

 

What it is imagined the British did or did not do in German East Africa, India or elsewhere is quite besides the point. Once you have a thread which contains statements like 'Whatabout what the US cavalry did to the Plains Indians in the 1870s?', then you know that you are part of a thread which on page 112, posting 3489 will be discussing what the Australian army is alleged to have done in some obscure part of Afghanistan in 2009. At this point the two surviving participants will look at each other and say, each unto the other, 'How did we get here?' Well, you got there by starting down a road paved with whataboutery, the first slab of which was by comparing the actions of the US Cavalry in 1870 to the German Second Army in 1914. 

Stick to the point.

[KONDOA]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/02/namibian-tribes-reject-germanys-offensive-offer-1bn-colonial/

[bushfighter]

Atrocities are legally & morally unacceptable today (but I came across more than a few in the not too distant past, that had their roots in Balkan communal hatred). 

But there are reasons for atrocities, right or wrong.

Over the years, up to today, white infantrymen carrying out their government's foreign policies in Africa and Asia, soon found out that their local enemies knew a thing or two about inflicting excruciating pain and disfigurement on captured white men.  This could be performed as a warning to other white troops or as an evening's entertainment for local supporters - read Conrad and Kipling.

In such an atmosphere reprisal atrocities flourish, and military management often find it impossible to control or prevent them.

This of course is what today's sophisticated insurgents want to see, as it strengthens their cause with the local population, whom they need on their side.

Please, before you condemn security force atrocities outright, think of the Private soldiers at the bottom of the military ladder who go out daily and face the rather hideous situations that local insurgents can prepare for them.

It may be impossible for civilians to appreciate this, but once a military sub-unit loses comrades in particularly horrific ways then there is an unspoken commitment by all ranks for retribution.

And so the cycles of violence go on until one side, today often the intruder, loses internal political support and will.  And a lot of foot soldiers on both sides remain, living lives damaged physically and mentally, and sometimes dreaming of further retribution.

Harry

 

[healdav]

16 hours ago, bushfighter said:

Over the years, up to today, white infantrymen carrying out their government's foreign policies in Africa and Asia, soon found out that their local enemies knew a thing or two about inflicting excruciating pain and disfigurement on captured white men.  This could be performed as a warning to other white troops or as an evening's entertainment for local supporters - read Conrad and Kipling.

 

 

"When you're lying out on Afghanistan's plains,

And the women come out to cut up what remains,

Then roll on your rifle and blow out your brains,

And go to your God ,like a soldier".

[Simon Bull]

There is an excellent book on the genocide in what is now Namibia - "The Kaiser's Holocaust: Germany's Forgotten Genocide and the Colonial Roots of Nazism" by David Olusoga and Casper Erichsen.

This book demonstrates the scale of the killing and shows how some of those behind it influenced the views which in later years grew into the holocaust.  There is a clear connection between the two genocides.

 

If one visits Namibia the German influence remains clear and apparent despite how short the German colonial rule was there.

 

[Hedley Malloch]

On 10/07/2021 at 17:33, bushfighter said:

Over the years, up to today, white infantrymen carrying out their government's foreign policies in Africa and Asia, soon found out that their local enemies knew a thing or two about inflicting excruciating pain and disfigurement on captured white men.  This could be performed as a warning to other white troops or as an evening's entertainment for local supporters - read Conrad and Kipling.

 

Do you think there is a moral equivalence between 'the white infantryman' and their 'local enemies'? And why do you use language which sanitises the behaviour of the white infantryman, who apparently is only 'carrying out their government's foreign policies', whilst condemning the 'local natives'  who inflict 'excruciating pain and disfigurement on captured white men ... as an evening's entertainment'? Such language lets the white soldier off the moral hook whilst blackening his enemy.